Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 2024-08-17 16:33:05 +0000, Richard Damon said:
On 8/17/24 12:27 PM, olcott wrote:On 8/17/2024 11:17 AM, Mike Terry wrote:>If I post here these days it is generally for the possible benefit of others conversing with PO - e.g. perhaps it seems to me that weeks of time are being wasted /through some simple miscommunication/ with PO. I've been around longer than the current (relative) newcommers [not as long as you and Ben I think], so I have more context for what PO is trying to say,>
*Yet you persistently fail to agree with Ben on this*
>
Because you just don't understand what Ben said here, because you are just too stupid.
>>
On 10/14/2022 7:44 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:I don't think that is the shell game. PO really /has/ an H...
(it's trivial to do for this one case) that correctly determines
that P(P) *would* never stop running *unless* aborted.But H determines (correctly) that D would not halt if it
were not halted. That much is a truism.
The input to HHH is its parameter of the machine address ofOne problem in these discussion is that the term "input" has no formal>>
>
*This is a simpler version that*
*defines correctly simulated in*
*a way that has no correct rebuttal*
>
void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
}
>
_DDD()
[00002172] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping
[00002173] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping
[00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
[0000217f] 83c404 add esp,+04
[00002182] 5d pop ebp
[00002183] c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
>
*It is a basic fact that DDD emulated by HHH according to*
*the semantics of the x86 language cannot possibly stop*
*running unless aborted* (out of memory error excluded)
>
<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never
stop running unless aborted then
>
H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
</MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
>
Which is just a repeating of the lies that have been disproven, showing that you don't understand the words you say,
>
The input DDD can't be just those bytes, or it is just a category error.
definition and its informal meaning is vague, like informal meanings
usually are.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.